Re: xmlsch-02

Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:


[...]

> 
> UGH! Please, no.
> 
> If Peter or others are unhappy about our fudging, then we shouldn't
> fudge, and we should take the stricter position that lexical forms
> are lexical forms are lexical forms and no whitespace processing
> is ever to be applied to any lexical form.

Why is that preferrable?  This has come up at all because the most 
commonly used library Xerces, implements the more forgiving function. 
It has been suggested we should not specify something that most 
implementations wont implement?  In effect this suggestion arises from 
implementation feedback.

Brian
> 
> Patrick

Received on Tuesday, 26 August 2003 04:59:36 UTC